Will the members of the United States Congress see through the Indian dezinformatsiya and reject nuclear proliferation which will be encouraged if the U.S.-India ‘Nukes-for-Mangoes’ deal gets through in its present form?
Washington-based Khalistan Affairs Center continues to lobby against the US-India ‘Nukes-for-Mangoes’ deal
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, December 06, 2006 - As the lame duck U.S. Congress prepares to reconcile the Senate and House Bills on the Indo-US ‘Nukes-for-Mangoes’ deal, Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns will be visiting New Delhi today on a three days visit for important consultations with the Indian government – problems? This nuclear deal, which may come up for a final vote on the Hill this week, is of supreme concern to the 25 million strong Sikh nation, (22 million captive in India and 3 million free in the diaspora) as this nuclear proliferation would make the Sikh Homeland of Punjab, Khalistan, (sandwiched as it is between two rival nuclear-armed states, India and Pakistan) into a South Asian nuclear battlefield just like it was made a battlefield, in the past, when the two conventional Indo-Pak wars took place in 1965 and 1971. (See Khalistan Calling of November 15, 06, headlined, “Washington-based Khalistan Affairs Center launches advocacy campaign to educate U.S. Law makers against the US-India ‘Nukes-for-Mangoes’ deal.” by clicking at:> http://khalistan-affairs.org/home/khalistancalling/2006/november15.aspx <)According to a State Department announcement, “Under Secretary Burns will be in New Delhi from December 6 to 9 for the US-India strategic dialogue and bilateral discussions". The Burns 3-days visit follows a letter written by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to the Chairmen of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations and House International Relations Committees. In that letter Secretary Rice, is reported by the Indian Express newspaper, to have made suggestions that would set the stage for the reconciliation this week of the Senate and House versions of the nuclear deal under section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, without making it conditional on an end to fissile material production or end to future nuclear testing by India. According to a New Delhi datelined report in yesterday’s Indian Express planted by Pranab Dhal Samanta, headlined, “Rice sends roadmap to Hill on how to get past hurdles in n-Bill,” (> http://www.indianexpress.com/story/17936.html <) US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in her letter to the two Committee Chairmen, is reported to have listed nine ‘concern’ areas and suggested specific solutions for them so that the law in its final shape is closer to the agenda set during the July 18, 2005, White House meeting between President Bush and Indian Prime minister Manmohan Singh. The initial discussions of the Conference are already underway. The reconciled version may be put to vote on December 7 or 8. The Senate has already chosen its six nominees yesterday for the Conference process following consultations. They are: Senator Richard Lugar (Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee), Senator Joseph Biden (incoming Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee), Senators, Chuck Hagel, George Allen and Christopher Dodd. Outgoing Senate Majority leader Bill Frist has been named as the sixth person to intervene to help resolve any difficult issue. The House of Representatives will also be naming its five-member panel for the conference shortly.”
The above mentioned report in the Indian Express goes on to say that, “From dilution of certain provisions to asking Congress to drop some elements, Rice has been very specific in her five-page letter. She made it clear to the Senate that the insistence on ‘annual certification’ of India’s compliance to its various commitments will create ‘annual tensions’ with India as it signals ‘a lack of permanence in the deal’. The newspaper quotes Secretary Rice’s letter and lists her suggestions point by point as follows:- On Senate Bill Section 11 which calls for the ‘Establishment of a Cooperative Threat Reduction Program between the two countries,’ Secretary Rice has suggested that, “The program should be made discretionary, not mandatory, and similarly, it should be ‘renamed US-India Scientific Non-proliferation Cooperation Program...thus reflecting the program’s focus on non-proliferation cooperation rather than confusing it with the existing Cooperative Threat Reduction Program”. On Senate Bill Sections 105(3) and (4) which says that, “the Proposed law will apply only when the India-IAEA safeguards agreement has entered into force and substantial progress has been made towards implementing the Additional Protocol, Secretary Rice has suggested that, “We request that the language require that an India-IAEA Safeguards Agreement ‘has been fully negotiated and is awaiting submission to the IAEA Board of Governors for approval’. Alternatively, the language could revert to the House Bill which requires that India and IAEA conclude a safeguards agreement and are making substantial progress toward concluding an Additional Protocol.”
On Senate Bill Section 105 (8) which wants that India (should) back all efforts to dissuade, sanction and contain Iran for its nuclear program in line with UN Security Council resolutions, Secretary Rice, according to the Indian Express has suggested in her letter to the two Chairmen that, “Although we appreciate India’s past support and expect continued cooperation in this area, this certification would be viewed by India as adding additional conditions...and could reopen the terms of the initiative to renegotiation. Therefore, we recommend the conferees defer to the House Bill which contains similar language under ‘statement of policy”. On Senate Bill, Section 106 which bans transfer of technologies related to enrichment, reprocessing and heavy water production Secretary Rice has suggested that, “It is not appropriate to single out India, which has been a responsible steward of its nuclear technology. We request that the Senate defer to the House Bill, which does not include such a limitation or the Senate can ask for prior intimation ahead of any such transfer.” On Senate Bill Section 107: Mandates a specific end-use program for India, Secretary Rice has suggested that, “Given that the subject is currently under negotiations, the provision is “severely limiting our options...we would recommend making the provision non-binding”.
On House Bill Section 4(d) (2) which requires US to make political commitments in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) that it will not allow fuel supplies to India if it violates NSG guidelines, Secretary Rice has recommended that, “the House defer to the Senate, which does not contain a similar requirement.” On House Bill Section 4(d)(3) which triggers automatic sanction by cutting off all nuclear cooperation in case India violates guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group or the Missile Technology Control Regime, Secretary Rice has suggested that, “This would harm US-India relations and the cooperative NSG and MTCR regimes. The regimes set policy guidelines rather than legal prohibitions and operate by consensus, making it difficult to determine and agree on violations...we request the House to defer to the Senate, which does not include a similar provision”. On this House bill she gives an alternative that the provision could also be moved to the ‘Sense of Congress’ section or turned into a reporting requirement as neither of these sections directly impact the implementation of the nuclear deal. On House Bill Section 4 (d)(4) which though non-binding, urges the US President to lobby against fuel supply to India if the US terminates nuclear cooperation under the proposed law, Secretary Rice wrote that, “India has taken the position that this is a deal-killer, arguing that this provision is directly at odds with the US pledge to facilitate nuclear supply to India, Rice requested the House to adopt the language from the Senate”.
The above mentioned Indian Express report comes to the conclusion that, “This (Rice letter) sets the ball rolling for the Conference to reconcile (the House and the Senate versions) a clear indicator that the Bill will be finalized in this session.” It seems that Pakistan’s ill-advised neutral stand on the U.S.-India ‘Nukes-for-mangoes’ deal, has given India a free hand on the Hill to lobby U.S. Law makers with Indian dezinformatsiya and lies despite resistance from some Sikh-friendly Congressmen who are worried about Nuclear proliferation and the grave danger to the Sikh Homeland of Punjab, Khalistan. Meanwhile, Massachusetts Democratic Congressman Edward Markey, an inveterate critic of the deal, shot off a letter yesterday, signed by a group of senior Congressmen to Congressmen Henry Hyde and Tom Lantos, of the House International Relations Committee, urging them to keep provisions he felt must be retained in the final Bill. The letter lists five provisions of the House bill, and seven provisions of the Senate bill, which Congressman Markey said would strengthen the agreement from a nonproliferation perspective. The letter also criticized President George W. Bush’s administration for trying to persuade the law makers to strip provisions from the US-India nuclear deal that are considered unpalatable by the administration and New Delhi. Congressman Markey’s letter says, “We wish to strongly urge you to ensure that several critical nonproliferation provisions contained in the Senate and House bills are included in any final conference report.” Among the key provisions which the lawmakers are fighting to preserve are: A requirement that India fully support U.S. efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons; A requirement that International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards have entered into force in India before U.S. nuclear materials are provided; A requirement that the President report to Congress whether US civil nuclear assistance to India assists their nuclear weapons program in any way. A requirement that if the United States terminates nuclear-related transfers to India, for example as a result of an Indian nuclear test, the U.S. will work to prevent India from switching to another nuclear supplier.
Both the Senate and the House of Representatives have approved their own versions of Bills that seek to allow civilian nuclear cooperation between India and the United States after a span of three decades. The next step in the congressional process is known as a conference during which both the Senate and the House will pick their conferees who will then reconcile the two versions of the bill into one. Meanwhile some media reports quote an American legal expert, Omer Brown of the law firm of Harmon, Wilmot and Brown as saying that “the absence of a nuclear liability law in India could be a major impediment to atomic trade as currently, India does not have a nuclear liability law covering its nuclear facilities. (He is obviously thinking of the Bhopal Gas accident, which occurred on Dec 2, 1984, when an American owned plant leaked Gas which killed and injured thousands of Indians and the American company – Union Carbide - was held liable.) Therefore, concerns over nuclear liability will be a major impediment to any nuclear trade with India as most US nuclear suppliers would not be willing to work in India without nuclear liability protection." Omer Brown, is currently in Mumbai taking part in an Indo-US business summit, organized by the Indian government, in which about twenty representatives of U.S. nuclear companies are also taking part looking for opportunities in India’s nuclear sector. The Indian government expects this group to act as a business lobby, as it has assumed that after smelling lucrative contracts, it will act as a major pressure group on the US legislators, who will be sitting in conference this week to reconcile the bills on the nuclear deal, passed separately by the US House of Representatives and the Senate. This corporate group (which is looking for business) is expected by the Indian rulers to counter the active non-proliferation lobby in the US, which has kept up a steady pressure on legislators to ensure that the final legislation does not weaken the non-proliferation regime.
As far as this column is concerned, it has faith in the American legislative system that, in the end it will have the wisdom to differentiate between wrong and right and will not be tempted by any Indian dezinformatsiya about future ‘big business deals’ to hide the brazen nuclear proliferation which is inherent in this U.S.-India ‘Nukes-for-Mangoes’ deal. Most Congressman are of the opinion that the weak Indian leadership, under an unelected Prime minister Manmohan Singh (he was never elected but was nominated by the Italian widow of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi – the mass murderer responsible for the November 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom) will accept any, and all, changes the U.S. Administration makes to the July 18, 2005 agreement. This column will continue to support the Washington-based Khalistan Affairs Center’s Sikh advocacy appeal and lobbying directed to all US Law-makers asking them NOT to approve the U.S.-India nuclear deal in its present form as it will open a Pandora’s box of Nuclear proliferation. What is going to stop China from signing a similar ‘Nukes-for-Mangoes’ deal with its ‘all-weather’ friend Pakistan tomorrow? More than that, why would China or Russia, after this U.S.-India ‘nukes-for-mangoes’ deal, refuse, or hesitate, to sell ‘peaceful’ Nuclear reactors to the wealthy Arab Gulf states who are thinking on the lines of Iran? As a reminder to the U.S. Law makers, who support the ‘Nukes-for-Mangoes’ deal the Khalistan Affairs Center’s advocacy appeal is appended below which might help in moving the goalposts:-
Appeal to all U.S. Law-makers
Do Not Approve US-India nuclear deal
An Appeal from 25 million Sikhs
Honorable Law-makers:
The world’s 25 million strong Sikh nation has a hard time believing the alarming media reports that Senate Foreign Relations Committee is willing to approve, in the lame duck session, the US-India nuclear deal, under section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, without making it conditional on an end to fissile material production by India.1. Apart from the fissile material issue, how is it possible that worldly wise and well-informed U.S. Law makers are planning to give a ‘wink and a nod’ to the U.S. nuclear deal with India without any powers of oversight in terms of requiring the usual annual certification of Indian good behavior? What if India tests a thermo-nuclear device, sometime in the future, at its’ Test site, which is being kept ready near Pokharan in Rajasthan, and repeats what it did in 1974, by pilfering from its safeguarded civilian nuclear reactors provided by the U.S. and Canada?
2. The latest U.N. Human Development Report-2006, released last week, reveals (Table 21; Energy & Environment: > http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/pdfs/report/HDR06-complete.pdf <) that India’s electricity consumption demand projection - the raison d`etre for the deal - is 594 Kilowatt hours per capita - a paltry increase of 421 Kilowatt hours per capita in twenty three years. Electricity demand per capita in India (where over seven hundred million human beings have no access to clean water and sanitation - no latrines) is increasing at a snail’s pace as compared to the galloping demand in countries like S. Korea (7,338 Kilowatt hours per capita), Saudi Arabia (6,749), South Africa (4,595), Malaysia (3,196), Argentina (2,543), Brazil (2,246), Mexico (2,108), Turkey (1,979), Thailand (1,896), Egypt (1,340) Algeria (929) and others. These countries having all signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT was also ratified and proclaimed by the U.S. on March 5, 1970) have a far stronger argument for a nuclear cooperation deal, to meet their energy needs, than hegemonic, dirt-poor, brittle, caste-ridden India, at war with its minorities and sinking under the weight of a thousand mutinies. India has not signed the NPT because its’ hallucinative rulers have always treated the treaty with contempt. The three million strong Sikh diaspora (including half a million Sikhs in the United States) fear for the 22 million Sikhs captive in India, living dangerously and unhappily in their homeland of Punjab, Khalistan, which is sandwiched between two nuclear armed rivals, India and Pakistan. Sikhs demand a nuclear free South Asia. It is a question of survival of our people and our historic holy shrines located in both India and Pakistan.
3. Ladies and Gentlemen, please DO NOT approve the U.S.-India Nuclear deal. Even Republican columnist, author and TV personality, Pat Buchanan, has rightly described it as a ‘Nukes-for-Mangoes’ deal about which, he says, > http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=8671 < the U.S. has, "traded a horse for a rabbit, and some of us are wondering as to the whereabouts of the rabbit."